A randomized controlled trial of topical glyceryl trinitrate before transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy of the prostate

Periprostatic nerve block alone versus combined with perineal pudendal nerve block or intrarectal local anesthesia during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: A prospective randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy, safety and cost of combinations of perineal pudendal nerve block + periprostatic nerve block and intrarectal local anesthesia + periprostatic nerve block with the standard technique (periprostatic nerve block).

METHODS

The study was designed as a randomized prospective controlled trial. Patients with elevated serum prostate-specific antigen values (prostate-specific antigen ≥4 ng/mL) and/or abnormal digital rectal examination findings were included in the study. Patients with anorectal diseases, chronic prostatitis, previous history of prostate biopsy and anorectal surgery were excluded from the study. A total of 148 patients (group 1 [periprostatic nerve block], n = 48; group 2 [intrarectal local anesthesia + periprostatic nerve block], n = 51; group 3 [perineal pudendal nerve block + periprostatic nerve block], n = 49) were included in the final analysis. Pain during insertion and manipulation of the transrectal ultrasound probe was recorded as visual analog scale 1, pain during penetration of the biopsy needle into the prostate and sampling was recorded as visual analog scale 2, and pain during the entire procedure recorded as visual analog scale 3.

RESULTS

The mean visual analog scale 1 score was significantly lower in group 3, when compared with group 1 and group 2 (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the mean visual analog scale 2 score. The mean visual analog scale 3 score was significantly lower in group 3 when compared with other groups (P < 0.001). The total cost for transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in the intrarectal local anesthesia + periprostatic nerve block group was significantly higher than the other two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of perineal pudendal nerve block and periprostatic nerve block provides more effective pain control than intrarectal local anesthesia plus periprostatic nerve block and periprostatic nerve block alone, with similar complication rates and without increasing cost.

Lateral decubitus position vs. lithotomy position: which is the best way to minimize patient's pain perception during transrectal prostate biopsy?

Introduction

Considering the distinctive nature in terms of psychological stress and anal tone of position which is generally selected between lithotomy and left lateral decubitus (LLD), we postulated its effect on pain perception during biopsy, and investigated their association.

Materials and Methods

A prospective study for comparison of two biopsy positions which were perform in a different working day was conducted for 208 men (lithotomy position=86, LLD=122). The decision on the position was made solely based on the patient’s preference for the biopsy day, and all procedures were performed according to the identical protocol (12-core biopsy with intrarectal lidocaine gel), probe, and needle. The maximal degree of pain during the entire process was assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS), immediately after biopsy. After propensity matching, a total of 152 patients were finally selected (lithotomy group=76, LLD=76), then peri-biopsy parameters were compared.

Results

Between groups, no differences were observed across all variables including age, obesity, prostate volume, serum PSA, international prostate symptom score, and cancer detection rate, except mean (±standard deviation) VAS score (3.89±2.01 vs. 4.58±2.22, p=0.049). VAS score showed significant association solely with patient’s position (Pearson’s coefficient=-0.165, p=0.042). In multiple linear regression models regarding the effect of clinical variables on VAS score, patient position was a single independent predictor favoring lithotomy position to decrease perceived pain (B=-0.928, p=0.024).

Conclusions

These data suggest lithotomy position as a proper way to perform transrectal prostate biopsy with routine use of topical lidocaine gel in comparison with conventional LLD position.

Local anesthesia for pain control during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intrarectal local anesthestic (IRLA), periprostatic nerve block (PPNB), and the combined modalities in alleviating the pain during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature review was performed to identify all published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about IRLA vs no anesthesia or placebo gel; PPNB vs no injection, periprostatic placebo injection, or IRLA; combined PPNB and IRLA vs PPNB alone; and combined PPNB and intraprostatic nerve block (IPNB) vs PPNB alone before TRUS-guided biopsy. Sources included MEDILINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from 1980 to 2016. The main outcomes were biopsy pain score, probe manipulation pain score, and anesthetic infiltration pain score assessed by the visual pain scale.

RESULTS

A total of 26 articles involving 36 RCTs were used in this analysis: Although IRLA can lead to pain reduction, the result was not statistically significant when compared with no anesthesia or placebo gel (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -0.22, 95% CI: -0.45 to 0, P=0.06). PPNB can lead to significantly lower biopsy pain scores when compared with no analgesia (WMD: -1.32, 95% CI: -1.68 to -0.95, P<0.00001), placebo injection (WMD: -2.62, 95% CI: -3.16 to -2.07, P<0.00001), or IRLA (WMD: -1.31, 95% CI: -1.40 to -1.22, P<0.00001). PPNB + IRLA can lead to significantly lower biopsy pain scores when compared with PPNB alone (WMD: -0.45, 95% CI: -0.62 to -0.28, P<0.00001). PPNB + IPNB can lead to significantly lower biopsy pain scores when compared with PPNB alone (WMD: -0.73, 95% CI: -0.92 to -0.55, P<0.00001). There were no severe reported general or local complications related to local anesthesia.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis indicates that a combination of PPNB and IRLA/IPNB is effective and safe in alleviating the pain during TRUS-guided prostate biopsy. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to validate this result.

Combination of lidocaine suppository and periprostatic nerve block during transrectal prostate biopsy: a prospective randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the most effective local analgesia during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy.

METHODS

A total of 123 consecutive patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy for elevated prostate-specific antigen levels and/or a suspicious digital rectal examination were randomized to three groups. Patients received a 60-mg lidocaine suppository (group 1, n = 41), a periprostatic nerve block (10-mL injection of lidocaine hydrochloride; group 2, n = 41) or a combination of both (group 3, n = 41) before a 10-core transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. A total of 80.5% (n = 99) of the patients underwent their first biopsy, 27.1% (n = 22) their second and 2.4% (n = 2) the third. Pain was evaluated on a 10-point visual analog scale for each step of the procedure.

RESULTS

Prostate-specific antigen values ranged from 0.39 to 90.1 (mean [SD] 8.76 ng/mL [11.08 ng/mL]). Comparison of the median visual analog scale scores between groups 1 and 2 showed a significant difference (P = 0.004). The differences in the outcomes between groups 1 and 3 (P = 0.001), and groups 2 and 3 (P = 0.001) were also significant. Patients of group 3 had the best output corresponding to the pain sensations and therefore the lowest visual analog scale scores.

CONCLUSION

The combination of lidocaine suppository and periprostatic lidocaine infiltration is more effective for pain control than either lidocaine suppository or periprostatic lidocaine infiltration alone in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy.

Topical diltiazem before transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy of the prostate: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Injection of local anaesthetic agents around the prostatic nerve bundles during transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) biopsy of the prostate has shown to reduce the pain associated with the procedure. It has been shown that some of the discomfort associated with the procedure is secondary to spasm of the anal sphincter. Topical diltiazem can relax the anal sphincter. Our aim was to evaluate the use of topical diltiazem cream as an adjunct to periprostatic nerve block in reducing pain associated with TRUS-guided prostatic biopsy.

METHOD

Between September 2009 and September 2010, 114 patients were enrolled in the trial (from two centres). Patients undergoing TRUS biopsy of prostate were randomized into diltiazem and placebo groups. Patients were asked to fill out a questionnaire at the end of the procedure. The questionnaire enquired about discomfort associated with various parts of the procedure using a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS).

RESULTS

For discomfort due to the presence of the probe, pain during the biopsy and overall pain prior to leaving the department, mean VAS was higher for the placebo group, but the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Diltiazem cream has a better side effect profile than glyceryl trinitrate cream and is better tolerated. Although we have demonstrated trends favouring diltiazem use as an adjunct to local anaesthetic in TRUS biopsy of the prostate, this did not reach a statistically significant level. The pain scores associated with TRUS biopsy in our cohort were lower than those in the published literature. This phenomenon might have contributed to the results observed in this trial.

Evaluation of the efficacy of a combination of diltiazem and periprostatic nerve block in pain control during transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy of the prostate

INTRODUCTION

The choice of analgesia during prostate biopsy remains controversial. The pain has dual origin: from the insertion of the probe as well as the biopsy itself. Periprostatic nerve block (PPNB) is currently the gold standard modality for decreasing pain of prostate biopsy but it does not alleviate the pain of probe insertion. A randomised controlled trial was performed to test the efficacy and safety of the combination of topical application of diltiazem gel and PPNB for pain control during transrectal ultrasonography guided prostate biopsy.

METHODS

A total of 73 patients who were to undergo their first prostate biopsy were randomised to receive either 2ml of 2% topical diltiazem gel or a placebo 15 minutes before the biopsy. All the patients then had a PPNB using 1% lignocaine. A ten- point visual analogue scale was used to record the pain immediately after the insertion of the probe and during the biopsy. Any adverse effects were also recorded.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the mean age and prostate volumes between the groups. There was a significantly lower mean pain score due to probe insertion in those patients who received topical diltiazem than in the placebo group (p<0.0001). There was no significant difference between the pain scores during the biopsy itself between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical diltiazem significantly reduces the pain of probe insertion during prostate biopsy and can be used effectively as an adjuvant to PPNB.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of topical diltiazem and nitroglycerine for pain relief during transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Transrectal ultrasound biopsy of prostate is a painful procedure. The introduction of the rectal probe is one of the major contributors to the pain associated with this procedure. Drugs that relax the anal sphincter should theoretically decrease this pain. This study was done to compare the efficacy and safety of two topical medications that relax the anal sphincter, diltiazem and nitroglycerine, in decreasing the pain associated with transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

66 patients who were to undergo their first prostate biopsy were randomized to receive either 2 mL of 2 % topical diltiazem or 2 mL of 0.2 % topical nitroglycerine or placebo 20 minutes before prostate biopsy. All patients also received 15 mL of intrarectal lignocaine. A 10-point visual analogue score was used to record the pain immediately after the insertion of the probe, during biopsy and at the end of the procedure.

RESULTS

The pain scores due to probe insertion, during biopsy and at the end of the procedure in patients who received topical diltiazem or nitroglycerine were significantly lower compared to the placebo group (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the pain scores between the patients receiving diltiazem compared to those receiving nitroglycerine. Higher incidence of headache and fall in blood pressure was noted in patients who received nitroglycerine compared to those receiving diltiazem.

CONCLUSION

Topical diltiazem and nitroglycerine are equally effective in reducing the pain associated with transrectal prostatic biopsy. Diltiazem is safer compared to nitroglycerine.

Patient-reported complications from fiducial marker implantation for prostate image-guided radiotherapy

OBJECTIVES

To report on complications from transrectal ultrasound-guided insertion of fiducial markers for prostate image-guided radiotherapy.

METHODS

234 patients who underwent transrectal fiducial marker insertion for prostate cancer image-guided radiotherapy were assessed retrospectively by questionnaire with regard to the duration and severity of eight symptoms experienced following the procedure. Pain during the implantation procedure was assessed according to the Wong-Baker faces pain scale.

RESULTS

Of 234 patients, 32% had at least one new symptom after the procedure. The commonest new symptom following the procedure was urinary frequency affecting 16% of patients who had not been troubled by frequency beforehand. Haematuria, rectal bleeding, dysuria and haematospermia affected 9-13% of patients, mostly at Grade 1 or 2. Pain, obstruction, and fever and shivers affected 3-4% of patients. Grade 3 rectal bleeding, haematuria, fever and shivers, and urinary frequency affected 0.5-1.5% of patients. Only one patient had a Grade 4 complication (i.e. fever and shivers). Overall, 9% of patients had symptoms lasting more than 2 weeks. The commonest symptoms that lasted more than 2 weeks were frequency, dysuria, obstructive symptoms and rectal bleeding. Mean pain score during the procedure was 1.1 (range 0-5).

CONCLUSION

Transrectal ultrasound-guided fiducial marker insertion for image-guided radiotherapy is well tolerated in the majority of prostate cancer patients. Most symptoms were Grade 1 or 2 in severity. Symptoms in the majority of patients last under 2 weeks. The most serious complication was sepsis in our study.